N54 inline 6 twin turbo pioneering milestone

Long term a naturally aspirated engine is superior

The best is a naturally aspirated engine with a balance between displacement and compression, so like 4 to 4.5 liter displacement, 10.5 to 1 compression, high volumetric efficiency head(s), etc.

N/A is nice, a dying breed. Turbo is best, gets best performance. Neither is bad, well EV cars are boring.

Funny turbo noise..."too too to too!"

Is it true that small engines (1000cc and 1200cc) wear out much quicker with turbos?

Hi Jason! My huge thanks at first place for your wonderful videos. I need to ask you a question that has been nagging me for a long time now. Why do we need a rich mixture to reduce the in-cylinder temperature? Why can't we instead go for a lean one? My understanding is that the extra fuel that goes into the cylinder absorbs more heat to vaporize but that also means that more energy is now available for combustion which will lead to greater in-cylinder temperatures. Or the other case could be the fuel escaping from the cylinder without burning or partially burnt fuel leaving into the exhaust leading to greater HC and PM. So why would you ever want to inject more fuel to reduce the in-cylinder temperature? Why wouldn't you simple go for a lean charge instead?

One truly ugly vehicle.

Screw turbo-chargers! I want a car with an engine that will last 300,000 miles.

It is obvious you don't keep your cars very long. Your driving style suggests that. Your points regarding turbos are all correct, & they are best reserved for engines running at a steady speed. I had an opportunity to purchase a turbocharged vehicle recently, & although the price made it a deal, I declined the offer, simply because of the turbo, & the driving techniques it invokes. My Dodge Ram with a Cummins 6BT 12 valve engine & Holset turbo have run 1.5 million miles, & both are just fine. My 78 Ford F150 (351M) has well over one million miles & has had two rebuilds & one transmission rebuild (C6). I enjoy your videos & the fact that you speak knowledgeably,. There are a number of very well informed folk with automotive videos on the net, & a horde whose misinformation can most charitably be described as "unfortunate". Thanks for your technically correct video.

More faster? Did you mean less slower?

I saw a turbo that the bearings went out and it was so lose that it was grinding and filling the engine with aluminum. That means the engine has to be opened clean out the aluminum grit.

You should do a video on blow off valves and where to mount them. There has been a debate on mounting the blow off valve in the hot side piping vs the cold side piping and I think a lot of people would really love to hear what an engineer has to to say about the issue. Regardless if there is no difference. Or if there is a minimal difference.

so Joe public gets a 1.3L turbo engine with internal temperatures of 400°C convinced rationalising he's driving a dinky toy but he's saving the planet by improved fuel economy....never mind all the deferred costs and depreciation...etc., etc. Hmmmm 🤔🤔

I just want happiness and i want it now!

Thank you for sharing

Absolutely true. I own RC200t and it is shockingly bad car (or should I say car with a shockingly bad engine). I need to clarify this is in UK so we do not have RC350, we could have either R200t or RC-F. As it happens I cannot really afford RC-F, yes used one are now coming down to my price range, but I could never afford one new - hence RC200t. First of all, as mentioned the accelerator pedal is basically an on/off switch, there isn't much turbo lag past the point where accelerator is in "on" position, but engine completely doesn't like to rev past 4000RPM. It could, but there is no point as there is no torque to be had past 4000RPM... so again torque curve and accelerator response curve is exactly like depicted. On top of all these issues Lexus decided to put nearly identical 8-speed gearbox as RC-F... it is fine for RC-F but it is terrible on RC200t with already very short "power range", because it comes on power at maybe 2500RPM and it runs out of power at 4000RPM... meaning that gearbox is constantly shifting and feels like it is always in the wrong gear. Yes you can keep the certain gear manually, but as mentioned there is no point past 4000RPM anyway. 8AR-FTS (RC200t engine) apparently is high thermal efficiency engine, has otto-cycle etc. and it meant to be more fuel efficient, but let me be clear - it is TERRIBLE! As I said I don't own RC-F, but as I use Lexus dealer for service I have driven basically all cars Lexus has to offer, sometimes even over weekend. Further I have owned several IS250, which on paper are not as fuel efficient. And I can confidently say - RC-F is MORE fuel efficient car than RC200t. And IS250 just blows it out of this universe if fuel efficiency is concerned. In RC-F I can consistently get 36MPG on motorway and ~24MPG in city, on IS250 that is like 44MPG and 28MPG, whereas RC200t is terrible ~32MPG on motorway and ~18-22MPG in the city. Now obviously if you track both cars RC-F has a potential to consume more fuel, but equally it would drive circles around RC200t, but in normal day to day conditions just commuting on mixed cycle RC-F is more fuel efficient. Which is just ridiculous considering this is comparison between 5L V8 and 2L car. I tend to believe this is due to specifically the on/off nature of accelerator. In RC-F I almost never need to rev the car, it basically idles all the way and I can precisely accelerate just little bit by little bit, or really "floor it" if I need to. In RC200t there there is only two ways either all the way down to the floor or nothing at all. So if I joining motorway at say 50MPH and I want to match 70MPH on motorway I basically have to floor it, car changes several gears down, revs to like 4000RPM just to increase the speed a little bit. Whereas on RC-F in same situation I just need to press accelerator a fraction more and revs increases maybe from 2000 to 2100RPM, and it picks-up speed and matches required speed without problem. As result I don't think this terrible fuel consumption is surprising, just to drive with the flow of traffic I can basically idle RC-F all the way to work, yet I have to trash RC200t all the way. Although, even just cruising on motorways is not great either - RC-F easily reaches 36MPG and just stays there, whereas with RC200t you need to try very hard and it only return about 32MPG. Yes few times I have seen 38-40MPG on RC200t when I was driving through roadworks at night (limited to 50MPH) which is not achievable in RC-F at all, but as soon as you go past roadworks and get on normal motorway (70MPH) the fuel consumption starts climbing very quickly.

I got 1200HP naturally aspirated

You sound a lot like petrol heads and coal rollers finding problems in EVs hoping that it's all a bad dream and that EVs won't take over the world

Each of these points applies to electric motors even more. *Truly* instant torque, *perfectly* linear response, ....

Maybe you can explain why the 737MCAS plane is a an ill designed airplane. The responce of the steering of a car should be like a planes takeoff responce. The 737 is not a jet fighter and should not need three computers to paper over a mechanical and air flow major error in Design. It is the center of presssure running around that makes it fly wierd. The engines act like canard wings. h cause to much lift and then that lift has to be killed.

Turbo diesel expensive option :)))))) until the diesel apocalipse, in eu they where the norm.

Is that your own RC-F Track Edition? I freaking love them. I would appreciate a wing delete and a fixed ducktail instead, but you cannot have everything in life 😉.

Try Variable Geometric Turbo

If you actually plan to drive the car for a long time, don't buy a turbo.

The feeling of the turbo kicking in is the best. I dont care for turbo lag.

The RCF just proves Toyota could've indeed made the engine for the A90 Supra.....just sayin

If you compare the lag of some turbocars opposed to electric cars, that's a huuuge difference. The response from electric is so immediate, combustion engines are much slower, especially turbo and when you need to change gear as well

Sounds to me like you are describing turbos from an earlier era. Haven't you heard of sequential turbos? Many cars now have two or even three turbos which produce a much smoother and linear power delivery.

Cars with superchargers and nitrous are better for power!!!!!

Why so many cars with turbo than? Because they are light, fast,cheap and economical.

Only reason I'm adding a turbo is because I need less power at low rpm so the tires will hook up...

Honda kicked butt in F1 with a turbo V-6 in the 1980s. I'm pretty sure Honda has the turbocharged motor down pat by now.

More faster? Oh come on, what's next, more moster? You're a good guy but I'm beginning to think you're not an English major!

Love the RCF and LFA. Awesome work Lexus

You makes a lot of drama, you speak as a mechanic but the car nowadays work by compute >> we need IT more than mechanic to explain what really happened on turbocharged engine

I won' t buy a turbo charge vehicle. I already own a Bi-Turbo vehicle, lol Wait 5:27 is a Subaru Boxer 4 motor N/A then he jumps into a Bi-Turbo AMG, WTF lol

I don't know, his arguments against turbos. I've put a cammed 351 cleveland in a 66 Mustang GT and it ran really well. Currently I have a 331ci T-76mm turbo 95 Mustang Cobra There is not any lag do to the engine makes 400= hp and the turbo takes it past 800rwhp. With a T-56 6 speed with 355 gears I got 24 mpg on the highway. Performance there is no comparison the Cobra is F-ing fast. Sounds great too. Just my 2 cents.

There is turbo lag and boost threshold, I do believe he has them mixed up.

Has this guy ever heard of an intercooler and ethanol injection to prevent engine knock?

Wait...until turbo spool up, the turbocharged engine would behave similar to a naturally aspirated setup right? That means the torque delivery to wheels would be the same right.?

Yar Pic

27 dager siden

@Sachin G I guess the turboed engine will be a bit weaker in the low rpm because of the low compression but engineering explained would be better at answering that than I would.

Sachin G

28 dager siden

@Yar Pic what if we consider two 1.0l engine with same spec except one has turbo and the other doesn't. 🤔

Yar Pic

28 dager siden

He's talking about downsized engines (like a 3.5 v6 VS a 2.0 L4 turbo) so no. Also lower compression.

Under four seconds is merely "good". You would have hated cars is the 80s and 90s. Under 10 was quick.

Lets all agree that first thing in our mind we buy turbocharged car because of the Stututututututttt!!!!! Bwaaaahhhh! Psssssstttt!!! Stututututututttt! 😄

Love that shot of the sunset yellow Stinger GT. BTW...The Stinger GT generates full torque (375) at 1300rpm all the way up.

It’s all about instant gratification that’s not present with turbo lag. Unfortunately their are some N/A powered vehicles specially with drive by wire throttle that also have a lag. They way that I have personal found away around this is to first to hit the throttle around 50% then as it starts to accelerate then go to full throttle.

My experience has been that natural 4 bangers do not have torque. You press and they grunt and yell and the needle doesn’t move. The turbo bangers you press and that needle is moving. Not going against anything said here. Just sharing my opinion why I still prefer turbos. Now you give me a 6 cylinder or 8 cylinder than I prefer the natural over turbos. The Nissan VQ engine being my all time favorite.

This is a really terrible video. The whole video is explaining why naturally aspirated is better. That’s just clearly not the case. You’re cherry picking points about the worst of turbo versus naturally aspirated rather than discussing why both may be good or bad

These young guys are spoiled on high horsepower engines! When I was young one could be considered hot stuff if they were able to get a car that produced 200 net horsepower!!

Let's do a Ivtec Turbo. Problem solved.

On an ls car, with 8 cylinders, the power gained from the turbo is much more then a naturally aspirated one even when you have upgraded cam etc. There is a deal with lag depending on the size of the turbo. Yeah superchargers are good, but the price is high compared with turbo. Why they charge so much for super I dont know. There are less parts with a super.

Don't buy a turbocharged car Buy a NA and turbocharge it yourself

What road is that Jason?

its not fast under 4sec? what???

“It is not crazy fast... uh... zero to 60 under 4secs”.... You daily drive a F-35?

Donnie BunkerBoi

25 dager siden

Supercharged Miata which is about as quick as bag of potato chips powered by 🚀

hhn2002

Måned siden

omg i've been binging boostedboiz and emeliahartford channels where the average hp is 700hp up to 1000hp. i get it lolz

Here comes the Cummins fanboys....

I would like to see electric superchargers that only kick on when you mash the accelerator pedal.

... or simply get a Tesla model S ... 0-60 under 3 seconds

Put that turbo in naturally aspirated engine problem solved 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Beautifully Explained

Sorry man. NA engines are no longer they way to go. Your arguments are too weak! Go get a turbo asap!

I have Zero desire to play guessing games with Turbos.

what's the fuel consumption on this 5.0l engine?

I'm intrigued by this efficiency thing. When considering thermal efficiency, wouldn't you count the compression offered by the turbocharger into the total compression ratio ?

Larch Mtn nice! 😎💨

normally i agree with you but most of these issues are from older turbos like compression there are plenty if 9.5 and even 10 to one compression vehicles with turbos because engineers can adjust for fuel timing and valve timing also efficiency is exactly backwards from what you described turbos these days have almost no downside except price and even that is negligible

What about supercharger? Get boost with no lag.

can i remove turbo forever? Doesn't this damage the engine?

What about the SKODA OCtavia & SEAT ATEKA using new engine TSI 1.4 L turbo with AISIN 8 speed automatic gearbox ( AQ300 ) ? IS: performance, quality, life span , performance ?

I guess I have the best of both worlds. A 2018 Camaro SS 1LE and a 2020 Golf GTI. Love both cars and yes both are manual transmission.

5.7L V8 then twin turbo it with 61MM turbskis

3.13 before that flat curve, you have got away from the rest at traffic lights, and after the flat curve you are ahead. Hardly waiting 20secs to get over that lag

twin turbo fixes all those problems

I drive an older V8 chevy trailblazer. A pretty small SUV for a V8 (5.3, not the SS). And it does sound amazing. And yes when you put your foot down, it does make you smile. Forget about WOT, 50% throttle give you a hard acceleration and an amazing sound. That said, I've sick of getting 13 mpg. If I had the option in a new SUV for a ~3L turbo gas engine, I'd definitely go that route. Or another option worth considering that no one seems to do these days is make smaller V8s, like 4L V8s. A mid-size SUV woudl still be plenty fast with a 4L V8, and it would have a MUCH nicer torque curve than a similar sized V6.

Had a pos jetta tdi. The turbo wasnt any slower to kick in than say, vacuum operated secondaries on a 4 bbl.

TURBO IS TECHNOLOGY! Every kind of technology has pros and cons, and engineers are constantly working to improve them. Getting the same amount of power with less cylinders and less noise pollution is an advancement not a disappointment! Using two smaller turbos instead of one is exactly what engineers are doing to reduce turbo lag and improve throttle control. You better also think about the benefits of turbo and stop comparing it to bigger engines. That very car would've been much mightier with forced induction.

Dragos Pahontu

Måned siden

@Hamidreza Bokharaei hmmmmm... They should've allowed the oil to keep circulating.

Hamidreza Bokharaei

Måned siden

@Dragos Pahontu Hello. Generally speaking, the oil is always there to help dissipate the tremendous heat inside the turbo. But I don't think it would still be circulating.

Dragos Pahontu

Måned siden

After i shut my car off, does oil keep circulating through the Turbo to cool it off?

Get electric

Where are those smooth, deserted, twisty country roads? I need to know!

Peaceful Music

8 dager siden

All over America.

I mean all the best engines are always N/A The 6.5 l Lamborghini v12 6.3 l Ferrari v12 And obviously 4.8 lfa

I don't know about you N/A is the best way to do an engine

I don't think there is any driver who enjoys turbolag. It's just that some people try to reconcile with the fact that it's the way it is and thus they try to convince themselves that it's ok. Deep down they know it's wrong tho.

theres no displacement for replacement

oty............. 3 word anagram

Nothing beats a V8, it even beats a turbo to the pump

4:08 You know a true petrol head when they cannot fight the joy of that sound, the feel, the speed and the rush. Simply irreplaceable. Self driving cars: No thanks (self driving cars won't do this). Electric...sorry, just doesn't do it (no acoustics, no feel, artificial sound).

Since 1994 I’ve owned turbocharged cars. You learn to adjust to lag. My current car has twin turbos and lag is practically zilch.

Bit lost on this my BMW 3.0 turbo has torque from 1300 rpm and no lag and it was built in 2013 , what turbo cars are you refering to with 2 seconds of lag ?

I disagree with acceleration response, i got honda city diesel 1.5L, turbo spools at 1500 and all the way to 3600rpm and the RPM limit is 3800.. but being a variable turbo, it manages low boost at 1000-1200 rpm which is actually great, when i depress my clutch at 800 rpm without touching the accelerator, turbo spools up and my car is able to climb up hills !! 0 acceleration input by user.. you should check honda earth dreams 1.5L diesel, it's interesting engine And the stupidly amazing thing is, when am using engine brake in low gears on down hills, i have seen my turbo spooling upto 2.5 Psi around 3,000rpm on down hills, without using any Diesel, don't know how honda manage to do that but it helps in sudden acceleration.. 2nd situation is when am cruzing above 2500rpm, acceleration responce is actually very good, you barely notice the turbo lag.. maybe half second or Less, but i conseder it comfortable ride and not to give a big jerk to any engine and transmission components

Your talking about V8's lol ... hello its 2019 ( when you made this )

Love the boost, disagree. Naturally asparated ? The engines today are tiny ..they NEED turbos thats why they are more dominant now. How many small cars have greater than 2.5L engines ? zero. I want you to drive a 1.6L NA gutless engine ...We used to have 5L engines = no turbo , now we have 1.8L = Turbo. Again love the turbo and completely disagree with your opinion.

I have a '19 F150 3.5 Ecoboost. I love it. In Eco Mode with the 36 gal. tank, I get 600+ miles on the highway, and in Sport Mode, it's an absolute beast.

I drive a 2018 wrx, and I can definitely say the throttle is basically an on/off switch. It's very difficult to drive the car "normally". The slightest pressure and you're hitting boost. Many modern cars have a more sensitive throttle than I'd like, but the wrx takes that to the extreme. My previous car had a mechanical throttle that gave you tons of room and a smoother response. I do like my car, but they could have tuned that throttle to be a bit less sensitive.

Beautiful back roads for driving wish i had that where i live.

As if you could buy any car without turbos that's not ancient hence unreliable.

Yeah. Sure. Try driving a non-turbo Diesel if you can find one.

I love bro, however I still love turbo too! Lol.. love that boost!!!

There's nothing like the howl of small displacement, normally aspirated V-8 and V-12 engines.

And finally. Why would anyone want to own or drive s petrol car? Diesel is king

Man superchargers make more sense. Blocking exhaust flow making more heat! Still I drove them all. U want torque drive electric. My Kia 2l CRDI has flat torque 400Nm 1700 to top end. Yeah small lag, next will buy a Tesla!

Annoying voice yuk

I can't stand this guys horribly boring voice. So bland